Please note, I am neither an account or a lawyer… but I am a taxpayer and Seattle folks are facing a tax levy to upgrade our city street and transportation infrastructure in large part to accommodate businesses like Amazon and Expedia expanding in Seattle – so I have been thinking a lot about this.

This is about all of us as taxpayers – small and large businesses get tax breaks, tax incentives, other types of incentives, including use of city owned land or city will make capital improvements in an area to attract a business or as an agreement to a business being in a particular community. Small and large businesses use the same infrastructure that our tax dollars fund, such as the pipes to get the water in and the sewer out, the power grids, the roads to their business, and the sidewalks, and those tax dollars, include what LGBTQ adults and families pay into.

For example, if small business owner has a SBA backed business loan, that loan is backed by the federal gov’t, which means it is tax dollars, allowing that bank to take the risk to make that loan, so taxpayer/tax dollars are backing that loan, say if the business owner should default.

The small business owner is being supported by a structure that we all pay into, including LGBTQ people. So if I am paying into the structure that allows for individuals and families to start their own business, that business also has an obligation to uphold what their license and tax filing intentions declares what they intend do, which is to sell goods and service to the public.

In the city of North Little Rock, AK “requires all businesses to obtain a privilege license to conduct business within the city limits.” Which means tax dollars are also paying for the city services to provide zoning permits, business licenses, inspections, etc…as well as keep the road paved in front of the business, plow streets, clean sidewalks etc..

Small businesses and large are intertwined in local, state, and federal gov’t – all of which again is funded by the taxpayer: individuals, corporations, and businesses.

A business cannot opt out of this structure, to opt out is to leave America, to start your own country or move your business to another country with a different governmental structure, like Russia, China, or Cuba for example.

This is the democratic structure we espouse to in the United States… life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, for all… not just for some.

Freedom is not about denying one person’s rights or access over another, freedom is ensuring we all have the same basic rights and access. A business is licensed to serve the public, then it must serve the whole public. That is freedom.

Besides these state level “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” legislation having the opposite effect, which is to opens the doors to allowing discrimination against any and all of us, such as a business owner believes that Christians are against their beliefs so lets stop serving them; how does someone tell if the person asking for the service is against their faith, this gets into individual privacy if a business owner starts asking a lot of invasive questions, or is based on how someone looks or acts.

Freedom is about equality and fairness, I want to be treated fairly and I want others to be treated fairly. You are not free, if your neighbor is denied the same access, same basic rights because of who they are. We all pay the price for discrimination.

I don’t mean to sound dramatic, but I do feel like this situation has the potential to be a crisis, one that can be avoided.

I am sure you cannot remember the last time I asked you to support someone. I don’t do this very often and when I do it is someone close to me and often a self-employed artist dealing with some major health crisis. So with that disclaimer, I hope you will take a moment to read this.

I want to ask you to support my BFF Rijah, she is dealing with breast cancer and plainly put, she has exhausted her financial means and need some help over the next few months.

Please visit my fundraising page, https://www.youcaring.com/rijah, it was hard for her to let me do this for her. She is proud and has always supported herself and her three kids on her own, so asking for help from anyone or anywhere is really hard for her to do. I keep telling her this is what family and community does to support our creative and brilliant shining stars, like her.

Life is great for me in Seattle even though my I miss my New England/Boston friends, my Goddard alums and advisors, I miss that magic, and I want life to be great for Rijah as it has been for me these last few months.

As a concerned US citizen and taxpayer, I am in strong support that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service list the African lion (Panthera leo) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

As a person who grew up in the 1970’s I became aware of lions through book, by Joy Adamson and later the film Born Free, the story of the Joy and George Adamson raising Elsa the lioness and eventually rehabilitating her so she could live as a free and wild lioness once again. Since then, my own personal desire is to see all lions live wild and free in their natural habitat.

Since the late 1800’s “celebrated” big game hunters from the United States and Europe, including US President Theodore Roosevelt, have descended upon Africa in order to “shoot every living thing we can find today and see what bag is possible in one day.”[i]

Due to this attitude, excessive hunting continued throughout the 19th and 20th century leading the extinction of two of the eight sub species of lions in Africa including: Panthera leo melanochaita known as the Cape lion and Panthera leo leo known as the Barbary or North African lion. The Panthera leo persica known as the Asian lion, currently only wild in India, were almost wiped out by hunters and today approximately only 400 live in the Gir Forest National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary.[ii]

I believe the United States is being given the opportunity to begin to repair the damage that our collective attitude and our sense of entitlement we have over other living creatures as being “our own private resources” to do as we wish. We in the United States have contributed significantly to the rapid decline of wild lions and will continue to do so unless we start with adding the African lion (Panthera leo) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. We must send a message to our own citizens that trophy and canned hunting of lions is abhorrent, unjust, and not supported.

We have a global responsibility to correct this wrong and change our attitudes and belief system about other living creatures, including and especially lions. We should be working with and following the lead of African conservation leaders in their quest to balance human population needs and the conservation, protection, and growth of wild lions across Africa.

Therefore, I strongly encourage the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service list the African lion (Panthera leo) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

Thesis questions/focus: 1) Did Virginia Prince and/or Sylvia Rivera’s activism contribute to the early gay rights and/or transgender movement; 2) how long have transgender activists I interviewed been involved in educating the public and how did they come to be involved; 3) how did the intense public debate regarding ENDA during Sept 2007 through Nov 2007 impact members of the transgender activist community I interviewed; 4) what is my motivation for being involved with transgender activism and my reaction to the “ENDA Crisis;” 5) how has this project has changed my relationship with the transgender activists I interviewed?

Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera

Intent of Inquiry:

I am a transgender activist that has been participating in the transgender rights movement for the last ten years locally in Boston, MA and also nationally. Although I have been part of this movement, I feel as though I am not as knowledgeable about the history of transgender activism in the United States as I would like to be. Additionally, there have also been accusations by some gay, lesbian, and bisexual activists (GLB) that the transgender community has recently “tagged on” to the civil rights work and the transgender community is trying to get a “free ride” without having done any work for their own rights. It is like some GLB activists and politicians are saying we [transgender people] have just shown up today and expect to be included. Recently, Representative Barney Frank alluded to this assumption in his 2007 statement he released after he introduced an employment non-discrimination bill to be voted on the House that only included sexual orientation after previously introducing an employment non-discrimination bill that included sexual orientation and gender identity.

Rep. Barney Frank

“When the bill banning sexual orientation discrimination was first introduced by Bella Abzug and Paul Tsongas more than thirty years ago, it was a remote hope. Over time because of a good deal of work, education of the general public, and particularly the decision by tens of millions of gay and lesbian people over that time to be honest about our sexual orientation, we have finally reached the point where we have a majority in the House ready to pass this bill. Those of us who are sponsoring it had hoped that we could also include in the prohibition discrimination based on gender identity. This is a fairly recent addition to the fight, and part of the problem we face is that while there have been literally decades of education of the public about the unfairness of sexual orientation discrimination and the inaccuracy of the myths that perpetuated it, our educational efforts regarding gender identity are much less far along, and given the prejudices that exist, face a steeper climb.”– Rep. Barney Frank

I find this argument unjust and I also feel that is likely to be untrue, but I have not had the historical facts to back up what I feel. I feel that transgender people have been fighting for liberation and equal rights for as long as gay, lesbian, and bisexual people have and alongside GLB people. Therefore, I intend to examine the time period around the 1950’s through mid 1970’s to see if there was transgender education and/or unity in the beginning of what is consider the gay rights movement. I will narrow this examination down through investigating the lives and activism of past transgender leaders, Virginia Prince and Sylvia Rivera.

Virginia Prince

In addition, I want to also understand how those who live openly as transgender and are community educators, leaders, and/or activists of today were affected by and dealt with the civil rights setbacks of the 2007 specifically the “ENDA Crisis.” Through the my oral history project, Boston Area Transgender Community Leaders and the “ENDA Crisis” I would like to explore and understand the experiences, feelings, and reactions of the interviewee participants during this time and about Federal-level LGBT civil rights legislation. I want to understand how these leaders came into transgender activism, what they think about legislative tactics as way to end discrimination and if they had to express a public message different from their personal feelings with regards to the situation.

I have identified the “ENDA Crisis” as the period between September 2007 and November 2007, during which there was ongoing public debate, community organizing, and intense lobbying by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, (LGBT) and allies of House members of Congress to pass H.R.2015, the sexual orientation and gender identity inclusive version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). H.R.2015 was introduced on April 24, 2007 by Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) and included both sexual orientation and gender identity, protecting those who are or are perceived to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender from employment discrimination. (Search results – THOMAS (library of congress).) This was the first time on a federal level that legislation to protect transgender people had been introduced, because for the last 34 years a sexual orientation only version of ENDA had been introduced.

In late September of 2007, Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) announced that the inclusive version of ENDA, H.R.2015, did not have the votes to pass the House and was considering dropping gender identity from the bill, because he believed that only a sexual orientation version of ENDA would pass as there was not enough education about transgender people. (YouTube – CONGRESS DEBATES ENDA/GAY DISCRIMINATION: Rep. Barney Frank.)

“Frank said that if the whip count found that ENDA could not pass with a transgender provision, he would strongly urge [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and his Democratic colleagues to move the bill to the House floor without a trans provision, with the intent of introducing a separate transgender bill at a later date.” (ENDA hits snag over transgender inclusion – Washington Blade.)

There was intense public debate in the LGBT media, blogosphere, and on email listserves regarding whether or not the bill should move forward without transgender inclusion. On October 1, 2007 the United ENDA Coalition, organized by National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce, sent an open letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House members stating, there is “United opposition to sexual-orientation-only employment nondiscrimination legislation.” (United ENDA.) This was followed by weekly action alerts, press releases, blog posts, and op-ed letters sent out by the growing coalition of the over 300 member organizations urging House members to only vote on a sexual orientation and gender identity inclusive version of ENDA.

There was also public outcry from some gay and lesbian activists about stalling the sexual orientation version of ENDA that could pass the House for the sake of transgender inclusion. Chris Crain, the former editor of the Washington Blade, responded in his blog and in an op-ed to San Francisco Bay Times that said “Gay Americans will go without workplace rights or other legal protections because of the trans-or-bust strategy on ENDA.”

He also goes on to say about the strategy of the United ENDA coalition “Now those who run our GLBT rights organizations have abandoned that strategy for one that makes absolutely no sense: try to pass the most politically palatable form of protection (in the workplace) but saddle it with the least politically palatable category (gender identity).

Make no mistake about the long-term effect of the “trans-jacking” of not just ENDA, but the whole movement. ENDA and hate crimes have always been at the top of the long and growing list of gay rights bills in Congress. So long as energy is spent on a trans-inclusive ENDA, then Congress has all the cover it needs to do nothing about more politically sensitive votes on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” or federal recognition of same-sex couples.” (San Francisco Bay Times.)

Craine’s criticism may have gained the most attention, because its being published in the San Francisco Bay Times, but others where making their dissatisfaction of the United ENDA strategy know through blogs, e-lists, and in offline conversations. Ultimately, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the largest LGBT political advocacy organization, chose to back the strategy to push for a sexual orientation only version of ENDA. This placed HRC opposite the majority of the National and State level LGBT organizations regarding ENDA.

I have decided to sell off the majority of my book collection, I am estimating about 250-300 books in total. I have carried some of these books around for 10 or 15 years and it is time to let go. I have learned much from them, been entertained and in some cases, profoundly impacted by some. I want others to have the same experience, so time for me to let go.

My overall goal is to significantly downsize my belongings, I don’t need to hold onto stuff just to have stuff. If I want to re-read any of these books I can take them out of the library or if I must have it again, download the digital book.

My plan is turn the profit from the books into paying down my debt. I am freeing myself of stuff and the baggage of debt from years of sometimes mindless spending.